« PredošláPokračovať »
whole world, so also the light, which is the preaching of truth, everywhere shines and enlightens all men, who will come to the knowledge of the truth. And neither will he, who is strong in speech, enlarge it, (for no one is above his master), nor will be who is weak in speech diminish it. For this faith being one, neither has he, who can say much respecting it, amplified it, nor has he, who can say little, curtailed it.* -Irenæus's 1st Book against Heresies, ch. 10, p. 50. (Bened. edit. printed at Paris, 1710.)
Against Transubstantiation. For all the bread which is of the earth when it has received the divine invocation, is no longer common bread, but the eucharist, consisting of two things, an earthly and a heavenly. Thus also our bodies, when they have received the eucharist, are no longer corruptible, having the hope of eternal life.—Quoted by Card. Bellarmine on the Sact. of the Eucht. book 2, c. 2.
Of all the works written by this saint, there remains only a very barbarous version of the books against heresies, and some Greek fragments of these books presented to us by Eusebius, Theodoret, St. Epiphanius, and St. John of Damascus.- Book 4 against Heresies, c. 18. (Edit. as above.)
Errors of the Early Fathers. In order that any one may be called by the name of Father, it is not required, indeed, that he shall have committed no errors, since St. Justin holds an honourable place among them, who thought that the happiness of the pious dead was to be postponed till the day of the final judgment; St. Irenæus who patronized the error of the Millenarians; St. Cyprian who believed that the baptism conferred by heretics was to be repeated; moreover Origen and Tertullian, who have erred in so many points, have been constantly reckoned among the fathers.-Delahogue's Treatise on the Church of Christ, 3d. edit. 1829. (R. Coyne. Dublin)
On the Roman Pontiff, book 2, ch. 2.
That Peter was at Rome. To begin with the beginning, we show that Peter was once at
very important. This was the whole of the tradition then received by the church, for he says no one will add to it or diminish it, and the whole of it is contained in the Scriptures.
8σης, ατε ο πολυ περι αυτης δυναμενος ειπειν, επλεονασεν, ετεο το ολιγον, ηλατ. Tovme.--Irenæi, lib. 1. contra Hæreses, ch. 10, p. 50. (Bened. edit. Parisiis, 1710.)
Ως γαρ απο γης αρτος προσλαμβoμενος την εκκλησιν το θες, ουκετι κοινος αρτος αλλ' '
ευχαρισια εκ δυο πραγματων συνεσηκυια, επιγεις τε και ερανια. Ουτως και τα σωματα ημων μεταλαμβανοντα της ευχαρισιας, μηκέτι ειναι φθαρτα, την EATÒA Tys els atwvas avasadews exovra.- Irenæi. lib. 4. contra Hæres. ch. 18, p. 251. (Edit. ut supra.)
De tous les ouvrages de ce saint, il ne nous reste qu'une version fort barbare des livres contre les heresies, et quelques fragmens grecs de ces livres rapportès par Eusébe, par Theodoret, par St. Epiphaine et par St. Jean Damascène. ---Nouvelle Bibliothèque des auteurs Ecclesiastiques par L. E. Dupin. (Utrecht, 1731.)
Ut aliquis hoc venerando Patrum nomine appelletur, non requiri
1o. Ut in nullis erraverit, cum in illorum agmine honorificum teneat locum S. Justinus, qui piorum defunctorum felicitatem usque ad ultimi judicii diem differendum esse censuit; St. Irenæus, qui Millenariorum errori patriconatus est ; S. Cyprianus qui credidit iterandum esse baptismum ab hæreticis collatum; imd inter Patres constanter recensiti fuere Origenes et Tertullianus qui in tam multis erraverunt.-Delahogue. Tractatus de Ecclesia Christi. (Edit. tertia, 1829, Rich. Coyne.)
De Romano Pontifice, lib. 2, ch. 2. (Ingolstadii.)
Quod Petrus Roma fuerit. Ac ut a primo incipiamus, S. Petrum Romæ aliquando fuisse os
Rome from the testimony of Peter himself, who thus speaks at the end of his first epistle : « The church which is at Babylon salutes you, and Mark my For Paphias a disciple of the apostles testifies that this letter was written from Rome, which is called Babylon by Peter, in Eusebius, in the second book of his History and in the 15th chapter. Paphias, says Eusebius, also says this, that Peter in his first letter, which he wrote from Rome, made mention of Mark, in which he figuratively called Rome Babylon, when he says, The church which is elect together with you at Babylon salutes you, and Mark my son.
Jerome also is a witness in his book of illustrious men, whose words upon Mark are as follows; “Peter in his first epistle under the name of Babylon figuratively signifying Rome, says, The church which is collected at Babylon salutes you. In the same way do Ecumenius, Beda, and as many as have published commentaries upon this epistle expound it. Besides, John in the Apocalypse every where calls Rome Babylon, as Tertullian has remarked in his third book against Marcion, and in his book against the Jews; and as is evidently gathered from the 17th chapter of the Apocalypse, where Babylon the
great is said to sit upon seven hills and to rule over the kings of the earth. For there was no other city in John's time which ruled over the kings of the earth but Rome, and it is notorious that Rome is built upon seven hills.--- Bellarmine on the Roman Pontiff, book 2, ch. 2.
Dr Delahogue on the same subject. But it cannot be affirmed that the Scriptures are altogether silent respecting the seat of Peter being placed at Rome. It is far more probable that mention is made of that fact in the words with which Peter concludes his first epistle, “ The church which is in Babylon elect with you salutes you." For if that is compared with the words, which we read in the 51h and 9th verses of the 17th chapter of the Apocalypse respecting Babylon the great, who has seven hills, and who in verse 18th is represented as a great city which rules over the kings of the earth, it is clearly perceived that by Babylon Peter points out Rome herself, as Tertullian, Eusebius, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, Orosius, and others explain it.-Delahogue's Treatise on the Church.
The following Extract from Bellarmine very forcibly displays the
absence of unity among the Fathers in their interpretation of Scripture.
“ But if any one build upon this foundation,” &c. The difficulties of this passage are five in number. 1. What is understood by thebuilders. 2. What is understood
tendimus primum ex testimoniis ipsius Petri, qui sic ait ad finem prioris epistolæ : “Salutat vos ecclesia in Babylone collecta, et Marcus filius meus.” Hanc enim epistolam ex Roma scriptam esse, quæ dicitur Babylon a Petro, testis est Papias apostolorum discipulus apud Eusebium, lib. 2, Hist. ch. 15. Papias, inquit Eusebius, et hoc dicit, quod Petrus in primâ epistolâ suâ, quam de urbe Româ scripsit, ineminerit Marci, in quâ tropicè Romam Babylon nominavit; cum dicit, salutat vos ea, quæ in Babylone est electa ecclesia, et Marcus filius meus.
Testis est etiam Hieronymus in lib, de vir. illust, in Marco cujus hæc sunt verba, “ Petrus in epistola prima sub nomine Babylonis figuraliter Romam significans, salutat, inquit
, vos ecclesia, quæ est in Babylone collecta.
Eodem modo exponunt Ecumenius, Beda, et quotquot in hanc epistolam commentaria ediderunt. Prætereà Joannes in Apocalypsi passim Romam vocat Babylonem, ut Tertullianus annotavit, lib. 3. cont. Marcionam, et lib. cont. Judæos. Et apertè colligitur ex cap. 17. Apost. Ubi dicitur Babylon magna sedere supra septem montes, et habere imperium super reges terræ. Nec enim alia civitas est quæ Joannis tempore imperium habuerit super reges terræ, quam Roma; et notissimum est supra septem colles Romam ædificatam
* Respondes Babylonem vocari non Romanam ecclesiain, sed Romanam urbem, qualis erat Joannis tempore.
Cæterum nondum affirmari possit Scripturas prorsus silere de sede Petri Romæ collocatâ ; longè probabilius est illius facti mientionem fieri in his quibus Petrus primam suam epistolam absolvit. “Salutat vos ecclesia, quæ est in Babylone co-electa.” Id enim si conferatur cum iis quæ Apoc. ch. xvii. ver. 5 et 9, leguntur de Babylone magnâ, quæ habet septem montes, quæque ex ver. 18, est civitas magna quæ habet regnum super reges terræ, non obscure percipitur per Babylonem Petrum indicare Romain ipsam, ut exponunt Tertull. Eusebius, S. Hieron. S. Augustin. Orosius, et alii.-Delahogue. Tract. de Eccles. (Edit. tertia. 1829.)
Tom. 1, ch. 4. De Purgatorio, lib. 1.
Si quis autem superædificat super fundamentum hoc, aurum, &c.
Quinque sunt difficultates hujus loci. Prima, quid intelligatur per ædificantes, Secunda, quid intelligatur per aurum, argentum, lapides
by gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, and stubble. 3. What is understood by the day of the Lord. 4. What is understood by the fire, of which it is said that in the day of the Lord it shall prove every one's work. 5. What is understood by the fire, of which it is said, he shall be saved, yet so as by fire. When these things are explained the passage will be clear. The first difficulty, therefore, is, who are the architects who build upon the foundation ? Augustine in his book on faith and works, chapter 16th and elsewhere, thinks that all Christians are here called by the apostle architects, and that all build upon the foundation of the faith either
good or bad works. Chrysustom, Theodoret, Theophylact, and Ecumenius, appear to me to teach the same upon this passage. Many others teach that only the doctors and preachers of the Gospel are here called architects by the apostle. Jerome insinuates this in his second book against Jovinianus. The blessed Anselm and the blessed Thomas hold the same opinion on this passage although they do not reject the former opinion. Many more modern think the same, as Dionysius the Carthusian, Lyra, Cajetan, and others.
The other difficulty is rather more serious. For there are sir opinions. Some by tl e name of foundation understand, a true but an ill-digested faith ; by the names of gold, silver, and precious stones, good works. By the names of wood, hay, and stubble, mortal sins. Thus Chrysostom upon this place, who is followed by Theophylact. The second opinion is, that Christ or the preaching of the faith is understood by the name of foundation; that by the names of gold, silver, and precious stones, are understood Catholic expositions ; by the name of wood, bay, and stubble, are understood heretical doctrines, as the commentary of Ambrose and even Jerome seems to teach. The third opinion by the name of foundation understands living faith, and by the name of gold, silver, and precious stones, understands works of supererogation, &c. Thus the blessed Augustine in his book on faith and works. The fourth opinion is that which is held by those, who explain by gold, silver, &c., to be meant good works, by hay and stubble, &c., venial sins. Thus the blessed Gregory in the fourth book of his dialogues, chapter 39th, and others. The fifth is of those, who understand by gold, silver, &c., good hearers, and by stubble bad hearers, &c. Thus Theodoret and Ecumenius. The sixth opinion which we prefer to all is, that by the name of foundation is to be understood Christ, as preached by the first preachers. By the name of gold, silver, &c., is to be understood, the useful doctrine of the other preachers, who teach those who have now received the faith. But by the name of wood, hay, &c., is to be understood the doctrine, not heretical or bad, but the singular doctrine of those preachers who preach catholically to the catholic people, but without that fruit and profit which God requires.
The third difficulty regards the day of the Lord. Some understand by the name of day the present life, or the time of tribulation. Thus Augustine in his book on faith and works, c. 16, and Gregory in